4 ms·

What is a "shame mob"? Does it include the people who started #DistractinglySexy ? Does it include people who post "I thing Hunt's comment was sexist"? Does it

by dalke 11y ago

What is a "shame mob"? Does it include the people who started #DistractinglySexy ? Does it include people who post "I thing Hunt's comment was sexist"? Does it include people who say "I do not think we should invite Hunt for our next 'Women in Science' conference"? Does it include the UCL ruling council? Or is it a much more limited set of people who, say, send death threats? As a reminder, and quoting from http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/09/tim-hunt-sexism-controversy-ucl-attempts-to-draw-a-line-under-saga http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/09/tim-hunt-sexi... : > One female scientist who commented in the media after the story broke told the Guardian she had received “such a torrent of abuse” on social media and blogs that she could no longer face speaking publicly on the matter. Other female scientists who spoke out had apparently also received death threats. “We’ve all been silenced. It’s quite shocking really,” she said. “It’s just not worth the aggro of waking up to calls for me to be sacked on Twitter and hundreds of messages. It was so frustrating to see the perpetrator becoming the victim.”

jsf666 11y ago
Some kind of proof? I've heard many such stories about feminists receiving death/rape/etc. threats and it turned out as a scam to gain attention.
- DanBC 11y ago
  Caroline Criado Perez campaigned to have a woman on the back of any of the UK banknotes. She received many death threats, and many threats of sexual violence. Those threats were real enough to convict at least two people in criminal court. There are very many similar examples.
  - dalke 11y ago
    Details are summarized at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Criado-Perez#Harassment_on_Twitter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Criado-Perez#Harassme... . The details about the conviction are at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/24/two-jailed-twitter-abuse-feminist-campaigner http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/24/two-jailed-tw... : > Two people were jailed on Friday for subjecting feminist campaigner Caroline Criado-Perez to abuse on Twitter. > Isabella Sorley was jailed for 12 weeks at Westminster magistrates' court. Co-defendant John Nimmo was jailed for eight weeks. > Judge Howard Riddle said it was "hard to imagine more extreme threats". > He said that, despite the defendants' claims, the harm threatened against Criado-Perez "must have been intended to be very high".
zamalek 11y ago
The classical "they've done worse" retort. I'll let you in on a little secret: Two wrongs don't make a right. The internet is rife with tu quoque. Even, if in the specific case of Hunt and his bigotry, death threats were not made against him it does not mean that this has been the case of all similar internet arguments. > Does it include people who post "I thing Hunt's comment was sexist"? No. Just like Hunt is free to be bigoted/racist/sexist, so are people allowed to have opinions about him: so long as those opinions are not designed in such a way to disrupt his personal life or in any way limit his own rights. > Does it include people who say "I do not think we should invite Hunt for our next 'Women in Science' conference"? No, so long as Hunt has the right to have his own 'Men in Science' conference without being picketed/harassed or what-have-you. > > Other female scientists who spoke out had apparently also received death threats. Much of that paragraph contains content that I would take the man to court over. The objective and irrefutable conclusion is that he actively limited the rights of those female scientists and that behavior is unconstitutional, inhumane and needs to be corrected. However, "writing a blog post" and the best-case-scenario examples that you cherry-picked are a far cry from what "shame mobs" do on the internet. Indeed, if you believe that mob (of any kind) would resort to such rational and sensible measures then you simply do not know what a mob actually is - it's not a group of people that simply disagree with another group of people.
- dalke 11y ago
  I did not say "they've done worse". I said "what constitutes a shame mob?". I should have made clear my implicit question - how is "shame mob" relevant to what happened with Hunt? Which actions constitute a "shame mob" response, vs. 'rational and sensible' ones? Without clarification, "shame mob" is a meaningless term because anyone will be able to read into it a wide variety of definitions, including ones that you and I think fall solidly under 'free speech'. As a historical example, when Republicans supporters shouted "Ma, Ma, where's my Pa?" because presidential candidate Cleveland fathered a child out of wedlock, was that a 'shame mob'? (When Cleveland made it to office despite attempts to use shame to sway public opinion, his supporters responded with "Gone to the White House. Ha, ha, ha.") If it wasn't, why wasn't it?
  - 11y ago

by dalke 11y ago

jsf666 11y ago

Some kind of proof? I've heard many such stories about feminists receiving death/rape/etc. threats and it turned out as a scam to gain attention.

DanBC 11y ago
Caroline Criado Perez campaigned to have a woman on the back of any of the UK banknotes. She received many death threats, and many threats of sexual violence. Those threats were real enough to convict at least two people in criminal court. There are very many similar examples.
- dalke 11y ago
  Details are summarized at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Criado-Perez#Harassment_on_Twitter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Criado-Perez#Harassme... . The details about the conviction are at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/24/two-jailed-twitter-abuse-feminist-campaigner http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/24/two-jailed-tw... : > Two people were jailed on Friday for subjecting feminist campaigner Caroline Criado-Perez to abuse on Twitter. > Isabella Sorley was jailed for 12 weeks at Westminster magistrates' court. Co-defendant John Nimmo was jailed for eight weeks. > Judge Howard Riddle said it was "hard to imagine more extreme threats". > He said that, despite the defendants' claims, the harm threatened against Criado-Perez "must have been intended to be very high".

zamalek 11y ago

The classical "they've done worse" retort. I'll let you in on a little secret: Two wrongs don't make a right. The internet is rife with tu quoque. Even, if in the specific case of Hunt and his bigotry, death threats were not made against him it does not mean that this has been the case of all similar internet arguments. > Does it include people who post "I thing Hunt's comment was sexist"? No. Just like Hunt is free to be bigoted/racist/sexist, so are people allowed to have opinions about him: so long as those opinions are not designed in such a way to disrupt his personal life or in any way limit his own rights. > Does it include people who say "I do not think we should invite Hunt for our next 'Women in Science' conference"? No, so long as Hunt has the right to have his own 'Men in Science' conference without being picketed/harassed or what-have-you. > > Other female scientists who spoke out had apparently also received death threats. Much of that paragraph contains content that I would take the man to court over. The objective and irrefutable conclusion is that he actively limited the rights of those female scientists and that behavior is unconstitutional, inhumane and needs to be corrected. However, "writing a blog post" and the best-case-scenario examples that you cherry-picked are a far cry from what "shame mobs" do on the internet. Indeed, if you believe that mob (of any kind) would resort to such rational and sensible measures then you simply do not know what a mob actually is - it's not a group of people that simply disagree with another group of people.

dalke 11y ago
I did not say "they've done worse". I said "what constitutes a shame mob?". I should have made clear my implicit question - how is "shame mob" relevant to what happened with Hunt? Which actions constitute a "shame mob" response, vs. 'rational and sensible' ones? Without clarification, "shame mob" is a meaningless term because anyone will be able to read into it a wide variety of definitions, including ones that you and I think fall solidly under 'free speech'. As a historical example, when Republicans supporters shouted "Ma, Ma, where's my Pa?" because presidential candidate Cleveland fathered a child out of wedlock, was that a 'shame mob'? (When Cleveland made it to office despite attempts to use shame to sway public opinion, his supporters responded with "Gone to the White House. Ha, ha, ha.") If it wasn't, why wasn't it?
- 11y ago